5 tools with complete schemas and descriptions, but significant quality gaps. Tool names lack action verbs (estimate_print, section_view, export_drawing, analyze_overhangs, search_models). Descriptions are present but generic (avg ~80 chars, below 194-char baseline). Parameter descriptions exist but lack constraints, ranges, and format guidance. No output schemas documented. No error handling guidance. No tool annotations. Schemas are well-formed JSON Schema with types, but missing validation rules and examples. Tools are single-responsibility and composable, but naming ambiguity and missing output documentation limit LLM reasoning.

• Rename tools with clear action verbs: estimate_print → estimate_filament_usage, section_view → generate_cross_section, export_drawing → generate_technical_drawing, analyze_overhangs → detect_overhangs, search_models → search_thingiverse_models.
• Document output schemas for all tools. E.g., estimate_print returns {filament_grams: float, filament_meters: float, cost_usd: float, weight_grams: float, print_time_hours: float}.
• Add min/max constraints to numeric parameters: infill_percent (0 - 100), layer_height (0.1 - 0.4), max_angle (0 - 90), max_results (1 - 100).
• Add error recovery guidance to descriptions. E.g., 'If model not found, call search_models() to discover available models.' Include actionable next steps.
• Add tool annotations via MCP metadata: mark section_view and export_drawing with destructiveHint=true (they write files); mark estimate_print and analyze_overhangs with readOnlyHint=true.